[B]It looks to me like most people didn't read my whole post. I'm not saying we can't use more computing power -- I firmly believe that some software demands will always be able to exceed the available computing power (games, if nothing else). What I was saying was that the rapid product refreshes that ya'll are clamouring for are actually inhibiting progress. There is a lot of effort required to actually ship a product out the door. The more often you ship a product, the greater the percentage of your total available manpower that is squandered on shipping the latest iteration. By doing this lesss often more time can be invested in the revisions, and the individual steps will be considerably larger. The net result should be half as many variations, but each variation that does arrive on the slower schedule should be quite a bit more advanced that the machine that shipped at the same time on the faster schedule. So leave 'em alone and let 'em get the next great thing ready to ship.
The PC market hasn't advanced too significantly since the G5 shipped. If Apple gets a 2.5GHz machine out the door soon then their rate of advance will be greater even though they've had fewer revisions. If they get a 3 GHz machine out by September (as SJ promised) then they'll be well in advance of the PC world's rate of progress.
I couldn't agree more. If the next rev ships in September with 3 ghz, PCIe, seperate memory controllers for each cpu and a faster Superdrive It'll be worth the year's wait. It means that Apple will have spent it's limited engineering resources wisely IMHO. Marginal speed bumps don't do it for me anymore- g4agoria nomoria.
True, but with Apple it is different: give them too much time and they'll pull a Copland on you - going to great lenght to ensure the mounting screws of the mainboard are just the right shade of silver to match the keyboard rubber feet...
They need constant market pressure to even release products, not just developing and then overengineering them.
Absolutely, but in my experience projects of ~1 year length can stay very focused and are still relevant by the time they ship. This is the target delivery frequency they are talking about, which is why I say that is a good idea. I'm just responding to the people who are grousing about that.
It looks to me like most people didn't read my whole post.
We read it, we just rejected it wholesale.
Personally, I don't have a problem with Apple redesigning hardware every nine to twelve months, but there's other changes they can make that don't involve redesigning hardware. Think about it-- how silly is it that a $1799 machine comes with only 256MB of RAM? GeForce 5200 Ultra video? Laughable. I think you can probably see where I'm going here...
Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that Apple doesn't bump the processors for another 4-5 months. In the interim, I think this would be a pretty good bump:
1.6GHz G5
512MB RAM
80GB HD
8x Superdrive
GeForce 5200 Ultra
$1399
1.8GHz G5
512MB RAM
120GB HD
8x Superdrive
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
$1799 or $1899
Dual 1.8GHz G5
1GB RAM
200GB HD
8x Superdrive
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
$2499
Dual 2.0GHz G5
1GB RAM 200GB HD
8x Superdrive
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
$2999
The great thing about this would be that except for the HD's and the new Superdrives, Apple wouldn't even have to do any additional testing. It's all just an upgrade to hardware they already offer, or have offered in the past.
The since the g5s came out Computers in the price range of the g5 come with 8x DVD burners 512-1 gb RAM and 120-160 HD. So without doing anything, Apple could update those specs or lower the prices slightly.
Have minor speed bumps isn't always the point, but keeping up with the specs of your competitors is. Why does the emac still only come with 128 MB RAM? The minimum for running half of the preloaded apps is 256.
Little improvements, and updating pricing would satisfy most people until the new ones come out.
But it is hard to stomach when you see a computer half the price of your 1.6 g5 that has 2x the hard drive, RAM, superdrive and a faster video card. That pricing looks pretty inflated. You can even get a comparitively speced AMD-64 machine for roughly $1300 from HP with equivalent specs to the entry level g5.
That being said...if that future set and price point above were true, I would be less annoyed about waiting till WWDC for updates... becasue the price performance ratio increased since the products release.
That being said...if that future set and price point above were true, I would be less annoyed about waiting till WWDC for updates... becasue the price performance ratio increased since the products release.
Dont convince yourself that the wait will be that long.The evidence for that is weak at best.
GarageBand is a consumer app, but the level you seem to want to run it at, jade, is a bit beyond a consumer level.
Hmmm, I don't have any musical talent so it wouldn't be anything I would use but my iBook came preloaded with GarageBand on it and it cannot play half the demos that were included with it.
Why is it so horrible? At least it'll make your purchase last twice as long before it is out-dated by a newer release.
Only if what you bought was up to date when you got it. Get almost any Apple product now and that isn't the case. Also, prices need to be cut when sales begin to lag. Can you believe Apple is still charging the same price for these products as they were when they were first introduced? That is virtually unheard of, especially in the computer industry. This seems to be a more recent trend as Apple almost always cut prices in the past.
Most likely all of us on here are huge fans of the company, but seriously, the current specs are becoming a joke at the stated prices. It is just CRIMINAL to spend $2999 on a pro level machine and only get 64mb of video ram. I agree with Gamblor that the specs need continous bumping between major hardware releases. If updates are going to come only every six months... and if Apple continues its trend of taking preorders and delivering product months late. That makes something on the order of an 8 month delay in the time a better machine lands on your desk. I was just forced to buy a PC (to run autoCAD). Keep in mind, I have purchased 7 macs personally over the years. I was blown away at what $1350 bought me on the PC side. I will continue to be loyal to Apple for the foreseeable future, but the specs really need a reality check across the board.
Apple expects to sell about 200,000 PowerMacs per quarter. They sold about 200,000 PowerMacs last quarter. When the number comes in for this quarter, we'll see where the market went, but Apple isn't averse to lowering prices and offering promos when they need to move stuff. If they aren't lowering prices, it could possibly be because they're satisfied with sales. We'll see soon.
This board remains fixated on desktops, but that's not where the market's going. The market's moving to portables. I think we'll see a quarter this year where PowerBooks outsell PowerMacs - with PowerMac sales within Apple's expectations of 200,000+ - and that will be the first of many.
As for the premise of the thread, where did the idea come from that Apple is increasing product lifecycles? The update cycles have been six months to a year for as long as I can remember. The quote at the beginning of the thread simply reaffirms a longstanding update schedule.
I dont understand it either, Apple creates killer hardware and lets it stagnant. The iMac G4 sat with no updates for a year and no the G5, what are they thinking?
What are the best G4s available? 1.5 GHz, even that is not much of a way to invigorate sales. Perhaps Apple truly has a killer lineup in the works, and not to create a backlog of products that arnt selling, Apple is clearing out the current stock before releasing it.
Unfortunately, the PowerBooks are in a much worse shape than the G5 towers...
And unfortunately (for the implications of your statement), they still sold almost as many PowerBooks as PowerMacs last quarter - a record-setting 197,000 of them - and, as I said, we'll know the numbers for the quarter that just ended pretty soon. We'll see if people buy hardware based on how long it's been since the last update, vs. how attractive the machine itself is for the price.
No new Powermacs will be released until ATI officially releases PCI-Express videocards. That release, I believe is scedualed for the 13th of this month. Which happens to be a Tuesday.
Someone might now say, well why would Apple jump on PCI-Express so fast?
It is simple AGP 8x is a power hog and a big heat source. PCI-Express walks all over AGP 8x in bi-directional bandwidth, power consumption, and makes perfect sense for Apple and what they try to do with their products.
No new Powermacs will be released until ATI officially releases PCI-Express videocards. That release, I believe is scedualed for the 13th of this month. Which happens to be a Tuesday.
Someone might now say, well why would Apple jump on PCI-Express so fast?
It is simple AGP 8x is a power hog and a big heat source. PCI-Express walks all over AGP 8x in bi-directional bandwidth, power consumption, and makes perfect sense for Apple and what they try to do with their products.
So much information, how do we know it's true? I like evidence... Because I've been reading to much bull about these updates lately...
So much information, how do we know it's true? I like evidence... Because I've been reading to much bull about these updates lately...
If you follow ATI, then you would know that their sceduled USA release date is April 13, 2004.
As for the rest, that is my speculation. I am trying to use logic in that speculation and not just wishful thinking. Besides, I am not in the market for a PM, or a G5 iMac, all I want is a friken job.
If you follow ATI, then you would know that their sceduled USA release date is April 13, 2004.
They may wait until after the financial call on the 14th and then there is the press invite at NAB on the 18th. Letting the lineup stagnate like this is a mistake though. I see a lot of laptops in the $1500 to $1700 range that have more standard features. Back in January Apple really should have cut the price on the iBooks and PowerBooks, bundled an Airport card or increased the base RAM on them. They need to stay competitive.
I believe that the G5 chip put Apple into a unique period in terms of updating. They were able to deliver the PM, but also know that IBM would start production on the 90 nm G5 a few months later. I believe that the decision was to start working on 90 nm ranges and leave the iMac until that was done. Heat issues might have been an issue, but I think it was more related to allocating resources for development if 90 nm platforms.
Now we seem to be in a position where everything should have come together, but we're still waiting. That sounds to me like battles with component deliveries - not uncommon when you're pushing the envelope PLUS want to have a stable platform for performance increases.
Once the 90 nm versions are released on the PM and iMac I think you'll see IBM pushing speed bumps rather rapidly when compared to the Moto world. Figure 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 on the next PM and then 3.0 (or higher) announced this summer. Additional speed bumps as fast as IBM can manage then and then IBM is going to bring out a dual core chip before you pay off your next Mac.
Personally I'm waiting for the G5 iMac before getting my wife one and the G5 PB before I replace my 667. The issue for me is simple - there will be some major software enhancements over the life of those computers. I think OS X will continue to be increase in the optimization for the G5 and within 2 years it will be primarily a 64 bit operating system, with installation bits for the G3 and G4. MS will bring out a version of VPC for the G5 and, unfortunately, I need that for one proprietary program that is currently running very slow. I see no reason to buy a G4 when we are on the edge of a significant increase in technology.
Comments
[B]It looks to me like most people didn't read my whole post. I'm not saying we can't use more computing power -- I firmly believe that some software demands will always be able to exceed the available computing power (games, if nothing else). What I was saying was that the rapid product refreshes that ya'll are clamouring for are actually inhibiting progress. There is a lot of effort required to actually ship a product out the door. The more often you ship a product, the greater the percentage of your total available manpower that is squandered on shipping the latest iteration. By doing this lesss often more time can be invested in the revisions, and the individual steps will be considerably larger. The net result should be half as many variations, but each variation that does arrive on the slower schedule should be quite a bit more advanced that the machine that shipped at the same time on the faster schedule. So leave 'em alone and let 'em get the next great thing ready to ship.
The PC market hasn't advanced too significantly since the G5 shipped. If Apple gets a 2.5GHz machine out the door soon then their rate of advance will be greater even though they've had fewer revisions. If they get a 3 GHz machine out by September (as SJ promised) then they'll be well in advance of the PC world's rate of progress.
I couldn't agree more. If the next rev ships in September with 3 ghz, PCIe, seperate memory controllers for each cpu and a faster Superdrive It'll be worth the year's wait. It means that Apple will have spent it's limited engineering resources wisely IMHO. Marginal speed bumps don't do it for me anymore- g4agoria nomoria.
Originally posted by Smircle
True, but with Apple it is different: give them too much time and they'll pull a Copland on you - going to great lenght to ensure the mounting screws of the mainboard are just the right shade of silver to match the keyboard rubber feet...
They need constant market pressure to even release products, not just developing and then overengineering them.
Absolutely, but in my experience projects of ~1 year length can stay very focused and are still relevant by the time they ship. This is the target delivery frequency they are talking about, which is why I say that is a good idea. I'm just responding to the people who are grousing about that.
Originally posted by Programmer
It looks to me like most people didn't read my whole post.
We read it, we just rejected it wholesale.
Personally, I don't have a problem with Apple redesigning hardware every nine to twelve months, but there's other changes they can make that don't involve redesigning hardware. Think about it-- how silly is it that a $1799 machine comes with only 256MB of RAM? GeForce 5200 Ultra video? Laughable. I think you can probably see where I'm going here...
Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that Apple doesn't bump the processors for another 4-5 months. In the interim, I think this would be a pretty good bump:
1.6GHz G5
512MB RAM
80GB HD
8x Superdrive
GeForce 5200 Ultra
$1399
1.8GHz G5
512MB RAM
120GB HD
8x Superdrive
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
$1799 or $1899
Dual 1.8GHz G5
1GB RAM
200GB HD
8x Superdrive
ATI Radeon 9600 Pro
$2499
Dual 2.0GHz G5
1GB RAM 200GB HD
8x Superdrive
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
$2999
The great thing about this would be that except for the HD's and the new Superdrives, Apple wouldn't even have to do any additional testing. It's all just an upgrade to hardware they already offer, or have offered in the past.
The since the g5s came out Computers in the price range of the g5 come with 8x DVD burners 512-1 gb RAM and 120-160 HD. So without doing anything, Apple could update those specs or lower the prices slightly.
Have minor speed bumps isn't always the point, but keeping up with the specs of your competitors is. Why does the emac still only come with 128 MB RAM? The minimum for running half of the preloaded apps is 256.
Little improvements, and updating pricing would satisfy most people until the new ones come out.
But it is hard to stomach when you see a computer half the price of your 1.6 g5 that has 2x the hard drive, RAM, superdrive and a faster video card. That pricing looks pretty inflated. You can even get a comparitively speced AMD-64 machine for roughly $1300 from HP with equivalent specs to the entry level g5.
That being said...if that future set and price point above were true, I would be less annoyed about waiting till WWDC for updates... becasue the price performance ratio increased since the products release.
Originally posted by jade
That being said...if that future set and price point above were true, I would be less annoyed about waiting till WWDC for updates... becasue the price performance ratio increased since the products release.
Dont convince yourself that the wait will be that long.The evidence for that is weak at best.
Originally posted by AirSluf
GarageBand is a consumer app, but the level you seem to want to run it at, jade, is a bit beyond a consumer level.
Hmmm, I don't have any musical talent so it wouldn't be anything I would use but my iBook came preloaded with GarageBand on it and it cannot play half the demos that were included with it.
Originally posted by Programmer
Why is it so horrible? At least it'll make your purchase last twice as long before it is out-dated by a newer release.
Only if what you bought was up to date when you got it. Get almost any Apple product now and that isn't the case. Also, prices need to be cut when sales begin to lag. Can you believe Apple is still charging the same price for these products as they were when they were first introduced? That is virtually unheard of, especially in the computer industry. This seems to be a more recent trend as Apple almost always cut prices in the past.
Most likely all of us on here are huge fans of the company, but seriously, the current specs are becoming a joke at the stated prices. It is just CRIMINAL to spend $2999 on a pro level machine and only get 64mb of video ram. I agree with Gamblor that the specs need continous bumping between major hardware releases. If updates are going to come only every six months... and if Apple continues its trend of taking preorders and delivering product months late. That makes something on the order of an 8 month delay in the time a better machine lands on your desk. I was just forced to buy a PC (to run autoCAD). Keep in mind, I have purchased 7 macs personally over the years. I was blown away at what $1350 bought me on the PC side. I will continue to be loyal to Apple for the foreseeable future, but the specs really need a reality check across the board.
The marketplace echos your statements...and PM G5 sales are suffering as a result.
This board remains fixated on desktops, but that's not where the market's going. The market's moving to portables. I think we'll see a quarter this year where PowerBooks outsell PowerMacs - with PowerMac sales within Apple's expectations of 200,000+ - and that will be the first of many.
As for the premise of the thread, where did the idea come from that Apple is increasing product lifecycles? The update cycles have been six months to a year for as long as I can remember. The quote at the beginning of the thread simply reaffirms a longstanding update schedule.
Originally posted by Amorph
This board remains fixated on desktops, but that's not where the market's going. The market's moving to portables.
Unfortunately, the PowerBooks are in a much worse shape than the G5 towers...
What are the best G4s available? 1.5 GHz, even that is not much of a way to invigorate sales. Perhaps Apple truly has a killer lineup in the works, and not to create a backlog of products that arnt selling, Apple is clearing out the current stock before releasing it.
Here is my wishlist:
eMac
$799
1.25 GHz G4
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
Radeon Something 64 MB
eMac
$1099
1.50 GHz G4
512 MB RAM
80 GB HD
Radeon Something 128 MB
Tower 1
$1599
2.4 GHz G5
512 MB RAM
120 MB HD
Radeon something 128 MB
Tower 2
$2399
Dual 2.6 GHz G5
512 MB RAM
180 GB HD
Radeon 256 meg something
Tower 3
$2999
Dual 3 GHz
1024 MB RAM
300 GB HD
Best radeon...
Originally posted by Smircle
Unfortunately, the PowerBooks are in a much worse shape than the G5 towers...
And unfortunately (for the implications of your statement), they still sold almost as many PowerBooks as PowerMacs last quarter - a record-setting 197,000 of them - and, as I said, we'll know the numbers for the quarter that just ended pretty soon. We'll see if people buy hardware based on how long it's been since the last update, vs. how attractive the machine itself is for the price.
Someone might now say, well why would Apple jump on PCI-Express so fast?
It is simple AGP 8x is a power hog and a big heat source. PCI-Express walks all over AGP 8x in bi-directional bandwidth, power consumption, and makes perfect sense for Apple and what they try to do with their products.
Originally posted by oldmacfan
No new Powermacs will be released until ATI officially releases PCI-Express videocards. That release, I believe is scedualed for the 13th of this month. Which happens to be a Tuesday.
Someone might now say, well why would Apple jump on PCI-Express so fast?
It is simple AGP 8x is a power hog and a big heat source. PCI-Express walks all over AGP 8x in bi-directional bandwidth, power consumption, and makes perfect sense for Apple and what they try to do with their products.
So much information, how do we know it's true? I like evidence... Because I've been reading to much bull about these updates lately...
Originally posted by Chaser
So much information, how do we know it's true? I like evidence... Because I've been reading to much bull about these updates lately...
If you follow ATI, then you would know that their sceduled USA release date is April 13, 2004.
As for the rest, that is my speculation. I am trying to use logic in that speculation and not just wishful thinking. Besides, I am not in the market for a PM, or a G5 iMac, all I want is a friken job.
Originally posted by oldmacfan
If you follow ATI, then you would know that their sceduled USA release date is April 13, 2004.
They may wait until after the financial call on the 14th and then there is the press invite at NAB on the 18th. Letting the lineup stagnate like this is a mistake though. I see a lot of laptops in the $1500 to $1700 range that have more standard features. Back in January Apple really should have cut the price on the iBooks and PowerBooks, bundled an Airport card or increased the base RAM on them. They need to stay competitive.
Now we seem to be in a position where everything should have come together, but we're still waiting. That sounds to me like battles with component deliveries - not uncommon when you're pushing the envelope PLUS want to have a stable platform for performance increases.
Once the 90 nm versions are released on the PM and iMac I think you'll see IBM pushing speed bumps rather rapidly when compared to the Moto world. Figure 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6 on the next PM and then 3.0 (or higher) announced this summer. Additional speed bumps as fast as IBM can manage then and then IBM is going to bring out a dual core chip before you pay off your next Mac.
Personally I'm waiting for the G5 iMac before getting my wife one and the G5 PB before I replace my 667. The issue for me is simple - there will be some major software enhancements over the life of those computers. I think OS X will continue to be increase in the optimization for the G5 and within 2 years it will be primarily a 64 bit operating system, with installation bits for the G3 and G4. MS will bring out a version of VPC for the G5 and, unfortunately, I need that for one proprietary program that is currently running very slow. I see no reason to buy a G4 when we are on the edge of a significant increase in technology.